Do critics still need to be anonymous?

“My wife and I will be in London for a month, so I thought I would check out some places we could dine. The restaurant reviewers, almost all of them as far as I can tell, publish their pictures in their web-based reviews, and these are people who write for well known newspapers.”

Yes, anonymity is a big difference between critics in the United States and in London. I was on a panel in April at the International Association of Cooking Professionals conference in New Orleans with restaurant reviewers from both countries. We covered a wide range of topics, but one of the most interesting was anonymity, and the pros and cons of being recognized.

In the United States, most critics try to fly under the radar, which is always difficult. In England, the critics do indeed lay it all out on the table, publishing their picture with columns. Some still reserve using aliases, but critics on our panel argued that publishing pictures levels the playing field. Restaurateurs can easily recognize the reviewers and give them their best shot.

The idea of how to remain anonymous is frequent discussion at the annual Association of Food Journalists conference, and one year we even had a make artist/actor talk to us about how to make subtle changes in our behavior and appearances to throw off staff.

A couple of weeks ago I had an email exchange with a colleague in another city, who thought it was time for U.S. critics to oame out of the closet and identify themselves, especially with the growing number of user-generated Web sites. Another friend who consults with restaurants argues that most successful restaurants have a high percentage of regulars, and that the key to continued success is how these customers are treated; being treated like a “regular” is standard treatment for the majority of customers. In addition, he argues that a restaurant can’t retrain waiters and chefs when they recognize a critic.

It’s an interesting argument, although I feel comfortable playing the cat and mouse game. If I could magically have my way, I’d go unrecognized twice and recognized once, so that I could compare the difference between the visits.

There are compelling arguments for both points of views. Let’s hear yours.